ORIGINAL RESEARCH
published: 16 May 2017
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00790
Cognitive Investments in Academic
Success: The Role of Need for
Cognition at University
Julia Grass 1*, Alexander Strobel 2 and Anja Strobel 1
1
Personality Psychology and Assessment, Department of Psychology, Chemnitz University of Technology, Chemnitz,
Germany, 2 Differential and Personality Psychology, Department of Psychology, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden,
Germany
Edited by:
Lynne D. Roberts,
Curtin University, Australia
Reviewed by:
Oliver Dickhäuser,
University of Mannheim, Germany
Ronnel B. King,
The Education University of Hong
Kong, Hong Kong
*Correspondence:
Julia Grass
[email protected]
Specialty section:
This article was submitted to
Educational Psychology,
a section of the journal
Frontiers in Psychology
Received: 09 January 2017
Accepted: 28 April 2017
Published: 16 May 2017
Citation:
Grass J, Strobel A and Strobel A
(2017) Cognitive Investments in
Academic Success: The Role of Need
for Cognition at University.
Front. Psychol. 8:790.
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00790
Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org
Previous research has shown that Need for Cognition (NFC), the individual tendency to
engage in and enjoy cognitive endeavors, contributes to academic performance. Most
studies on NFC and related constructs have thereby focused on grades to capture
tertiary academic success. This study aimed at a more comprehensive approach on
NFC’s meaning to success in university. We examined not only performance but also
rather affective indicators of success. The current sample consisted of 396 students
of different subjects with a mean age of 24 years (139 male). All participants took
part in an online survey that assessed NFC together with school performance and
further personality variables via self-report. Success in university was comprehensively
operationalized including performance, satisfaction with one’s studies, and thoughts
about quitting/changing one’s major as indicators. The value of NFC in predicting
tertiary academic success was examined with correlation analyses and path analysis.
NFC significantly correlated with all success variables with the highest correlation for
study satisfaction. Path analysis confirmed the importance of NFC for study satisfaction
showing that NFC had a significant direct effect on study satisfaction and via this variable
also a significant indirect effect on termination thoughts. This study clearly indicates
that NFC broadly contributes to the mastery of academic requirements and that it is
worthwhile to intensify research on NFC in the context of tertiary education.
Keywords: need for cognition, academic success, satisfaction with one’s studies, investment traits, academic
performance
INTRODUCTION
In decades of research, comprehensive studies have shown that intelligence as maximum cognitive
performance (see Ackerman and Heggestad, 1997) is one if not the most relevant predictor
concerning academic achievement and success in educational and work contexts, respectively
(Schmidt and Hunter, 1998; Deary et al., 2007; Strenze, 2007; Poropat, 2009). On the other hand,
the typically invested amount of cognitive effort, as it is described by intellectual investment
traits, has not been considered to the same degree (von Stumm et al., 2011b). Investment traits
are characterized as “stable individual differences in the tendency to seek out, engage in, enjoy,
and continuously pursue opportunities for effortful cognitive activity” (von Stumm et al., 2011a,
p. 225) that is, they determine how individuals invest their cognitive resources, how they deal with
1
May 2017 | Volume 8 | Article 790
Grass et al.
NFC Predicts Academic Success
success (e.g., Rindermann and Oubaid, 1999; Robbins et al.,
2004; Trapmann et al., 2007b). Thereby different indicators
assess different aspects (Chamorro-Premuzic and Furnham,
2003; Robbins et al., 2004) but are interrelated: For instance, job
satisfaction was shown to be medium positively related to better
performance (Judge et al., 2001) and negatively to increased
intentions to leave (Hellman, 1997). Hence, academic success
also depends on the satisfaction of students concerning their
studies or, broadly spoken, on their well-being in the context of
their studies. NFC has been shown to be positively associated
with affective variables like self-esteem (Cacioppo et al., 1996)
and affective adjustment (Bertrams and Dickhäuser, 2012) that
are likely to support adaptive reactions to academic demands
and to challenging academic situations. Furthermore, different
studies have hinted at associations between NFC and aspects of
satisfaction: In a first study dealing with affective outcomes it
was found that NFC was associated with higher life satisfaction
during the college years (Coutinho and Woolery, 2004), which
should be applicable to satisfaction within a particular domain,
too (Lent et al., 2005). For individuals with higher NFC-scores,
perceptions of higher complexity were found to lead to more
elaborated processing (See et al., 2009) and to enhanced job
satisfaction (Park et al., 2008). Surely, the requirements of
university education as the highest educational track can be
regarded as complex, that is, high-NFC-individuals should feel
better in such a cognitively challenging environment.
However, up to now relations of NFC to well-being have
been examined in a more general way (life satisfaction; Coutinho
and Woolery, 2004), using variables underlying satisfaction or
well-being (e.g., self-esteem; Cacioppo et al., 1996; Bertrams
and Dickhäuser, 2012) or regarding different contexts (e.g., jobrelated context; Park et al., 2008). So on the one hand, there are
only a few studies on affective implications of NFC in general and
on the other hand, there is no research at all on direct relations of
NFC to academic satisfaction. Taken together, a positive relation
of NFC to students’ satisfaction with their studies has not been
directly examined yet and can only be assumed due to the few
studies that have already reported associations of NFC with
satisfaction in other contexts as well as to probably underlying
variables of affective adjustment.
As mentioned above, intelligence is an important and
established predictor of academic performance (e.g., Deary et al.,
2007; Poropat, 2009). However, often it is costly to assess
intelligence in all applicants, so indicators of previous academic
performance are alternatively considered (Trapmann et al.,
2007b). At German universities, selection processes often rely
only on the GPA of the university entrance diploma (Rindermann
and Oubaid, 1999). Supporting this practice, meta-analyses have
shown prior academic performance as an important predictor
for educational and occupational levels (Strenze, 2007) and for
academic achievement (Trapmann et al., 2007b). Recent reviews
reported average associations of school grades with academic
achievement in university ranging from about r = 0.25 to 0.40
(Robbins et al., 2004; Trapmann et al., 2007b; Richardson et al.,
2012).
Furthermore, there are many findings concerning broader
personality variables and their relation to academic success
cognitively challenging material and how they enjoy
being involved in such tasks (Ackerman and Heggestad,
1997). Recently, a growing field of research examined the
relevance of investment traits pointing to their influence
concerning intellectual development, intelligence, and academic
achievement (e.g., Preckel et al., 2006; von Stumm et al., 2011b;
von Stumm and Ackerman, 2013). Accordingly, in this article,
we address the investment trait Need for Cognition (NFC), a
“stable individual difference in people’s tendency to engage in
and enjoy effortful cognitive activity” (Cacioppo et al., 1996,
p. 197) and its relation to academic success. While often only
defined by achievement in terms of grades (e.g., grade point
average; GPA) or similar aspects (Trapmann et al., 2007b),
we additionally focus on another essential aspect of academic
success that has been sparsely investigated: the satisfaction
with one’s studies (Trapmann et al., 2007a,b). Different articles
have hinted at the necessity to go beyond the GPA in order to
capture the complex meaning of success (e.g., Rindermann and
Oubaid, 1999; Robbins et al., 2004; Trapmann et al., 2007b).
Therefore, this study considers different success indicators to
give a comprehensive view on the topic.
As stated above, NFC describes individual differences in the
tendency to approach cognitively demanding situations and to
enjoy elaborated thinking (Cacioppo and Petty, 1982). It has a
large conceptual overlap with other investment traits like Typical
Intellectual Engagement (TIE; Goff and Ackerman, 1992; see
Mussel, 2010), is closely related to the Big-Five facet Openness to
Ideas (Fleischhauer et al., 2010) and can (together with TIE) be
regarded as a core aspect of intellectual investment (von Stumm
and Ackerman, 2013). NFC was found to have small to medium
positive relations to Conscientiousness, Emotional Stability, and
goal-directed behavior (Fleischhauer et al., 2010). Its associations
with intelligence do not exceed a medium size (e.g., Cacioppo
et al., 1996; Fleischhauer et al., 2010; Hill et al., 2013). Concerning
academic performance, previous studies found NFC to be weakly
to moderately correlated with college students’ performance
(Cacioppo and Petty, 1982; Tolentino et al., 1990; Richardson
et al., 2012). In school contexts, NFC has been shown to possess
predictive validity over and above other non-cognitive constructs
commonly investigated in educational research (Preckel et al.,
2006; Meier et al., 2014) pointing to its importance in other
academic contexts, too. The closely related TIE meta-analytically
predicted academic performance directly and additionally to
Conscientiousness and intelligence with a path parameter of 0.20
(ρ = 0.33, von Stumm et al., 2011b). The few reviews including
NFC report comparable correlations for NFC and academic
performance (ρ = 0.17–0.22, Richardson et al., 2012; von Stumm
and Ackerman, 2013). Whereas, achievement motivation and
other traditional motivational constructs have been examined
more often (Robbins et al., 2004; Richardson et al., 2012),
according to von Stumm and Ackerman (2013), at the time of
their review, only 12 studies provided data to compute relations
between NFC and academic performance.
However, to consider academic success only as getting good
marks and successfully passing the examinations would be shortsighted. Different studies have hinted at the necessity to go
beyond grades in order to capture the complex meaning of
Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org
2
May 2017 | Volume 8 | Article 790
Grass et al.
NFC Predicts Academic Success
number of subjects. (c) Study satisfaction supposedly would be
modulated by NFC and ESOC, but also by university GPA.
Finally, we expected that (d) termination thoughts could arise
from both lower university GPA and lower study satisfaction. The
model is depicted in Figure 1.
(Robbins et al., 2004; Poropat, 2009; Richardson et al., 2012).
Two reviews found Conscientiousness to be the only BigFive factor (Goldberg, 1990) that is able to incrementally
predict tertiary academic performance over and above cognitive
abilities (Trapmann et al., 2007a; Poropat, 2009). Likewise,
in a recent meta-analysis, intelligence, Conscientiousness,
and TIE were direct, correlated predictors of academic
performance (von Stumm et al., 2011b). In turn, Neuroticism was
strongly negatively associated with satisfaction with one’s studies
(Trapmann et al., 2007a).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Procedure
This study was conducted online via EFS survey (Version EFS
10.5; QuestBack GmbH, 2015) with anonymous participation. At
the beginning, all participants were informed about the topic of
the study and gave written informed consent in accordance with
the Declaration of Helsinki. Then they answered demographic
questions and filled out all measures outlined below. Finally,
participants were asked about disturbing influences and about
the honesty of their responses. Participants were forced to answer
most questions except for those related to their performance. The
procedure was evaluated by the Ethics Committee of the Faculty
of Behavioral and Social Sciences. It was not considered to require
further ethical approvals and hence, as uncritical concerning
ethical aspects according to the criteria1 used by the Ethics
committee.
The Current Study
As outlined above, previous research suggests NFC to be
of importance in predicting academic performance besides
broader personality traits and cognitive ability but more
empirical data is needed to support this claim. Furthermore,
the operationalization of academic success is usually restricted
to performance disregarding other facets like satisfaction with
one’s studies. Just like that, research on NFC has focused rather
on cognitive implications than on affective ones and respective
evidence still needs to be enlarged. Thus, with the current
study, we aimed to extend previous research on NFC and
tertiary academic achievement by considering not only grades
but different facets of success in university within one sample. As
mentioned above, existing research on affective variables focused
on other aspects of satisfaction (life satisfaction; Coutinho and
Woolery, 2004) or on variables underlying important affective
outcomes (e.g., self-control capacity; Bertrams and Dickhäuser,
2012). Therefore, the current study aimed at transferring
former findings concerning affective implications of NFC to the
university context using study-related indicators.
Accordingly, (1) We examined the zero-order correlations of
NFC to different indicators of academic success. On the basis
of Richardson et al. (2012) and von Stumm and Ackerman
(2013), we expected small to moderate positive correlations for
NFC with students’ academic performance. Furthermore, we
expected positive associations with satisfaction with one’s studies:
Enjoying effortful thinking should promote the enjoyment of
the tasks that are necessary for completing one’s university
studies successfully. If higher NFC enhances satisfaction with
one’s studies, it should also decrease the frequency of thoughts
about quitting or changing one’s major (referred to as termination
thoughts). We exploratory examined how NFC was related to
self-reported reasons for such termination thoughts.
(2) Furthermore, interrelations between variables, especially
possible indirect effects, were examined using path analysis.
Based on the body of literature outlined above, we expected
that (a) NFC and relevant broader personality traits would
be correlated, but would independently and positively impact
on school GPA. In order to reduce model complexity with
regard to relevant personality variables, we computed an overall
ESOC score of inverse Neuroticism (i.e., Emotional Stability),
Openness, and Conscientiousness that should reflect personality
characteristics beneficial for academic success. We further
assumed that (b) university GPA would also be influenced by
NFC and ESOC, but also by school GPA, which is all the more
likely as the latter is relevant for university admittance in a
Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org
Participants
Participants were recruited via email platforms of German
universities, social media, and advertisements on the campus of
a German university. A total of 407 participants responded to all
instruments. Three of them stated they had answered dishonestly,
and two partly showed no response variability; these five were
excluded. We excluded additional five participants who were
doing their PhD and one student who was in an orientation
semester. Thus, the final sample included 396 participants (135
male, M age 24.08 ± 4.72 years, range 18–49 years). They
FIGURE 1 | Model underlying path analysis. NFC, Need for Cognition.
GPA, grade point average. ESOC, overall score of inverse Neuroticism (i.e.,
Emotional Stability), Openness, and Conscientiousness that should reflect
personality characteristics beneficial for academic success.
1 These criteria include a sample of healthy adults, voluntary attendance,
noninvasive measures, no deception, appropriate physical, and mental demands
on subjects.
3
May 2017 | Volume 8 | Article 790
Grass et al.
NFC Predicts Academic Success
Control Variables
had currently been studying their major for 1–15 semesters
(M = 4.42 ± 3.00). Most participants (37.9%) categorized their
major subject of study as being in the field of humanities
(e.g., educational sciences, sociology, English studies), 13–
15% in mathematics/natural sciences, engineering sciences, and
economics, respectively. 19.2% stated that they were studying
psychology.
We assessed age, gender, major subject of study, general field of
study (e.g., humanities), and duration spent in the current major.
Note, that additional variables were assessed for exploratory
reasons that were outside the scope of this study (e.g., lay
theories of intelligence and effort). Including these variables
did not alter the results concerning NFC and study-related
variables.
Measures
Statistical Analyses
Predictor Variables
Except for categorical variables, correlations were calculated with
Spearman’s rank coefficient because only a few variables were
normally distributed (Kolmogorov–Smirnov tests, p > 0.05).
As we conducted multiple comparisons, we applied the
Bonferroni correction for 34 single comparisons, resulting in
α = 0.05/34 ≈ 0.0015.
Path analysis was performed using RStudio (RStudio Team,
2016) with R 3.3.1 (R Core Team, 2016) and the package
lavaan (Rosseel, 2012) as well as the additional packages
MissMech (Jamshidian et al., 2014) and psych (Version 1.6.9;
Revelle, 2016). In order to reduce violations of the assumption
of multivariate normality, all variables were normalized in
advance using Blom’s formula (Blom, 1958). This resulted in an
overall improvement in multivariate distribution characteristics
as evaluated using QQ-plots and Mardia tests (original variables:
pskew < 1.7 ∗ 10−8 , pkurtosis = 0.97; normalized variables:
pskew < 0.015, pkurtosis = 0.13), but still, the data deviated
from multivariate normality. However, maximum likelihood
(ML) estimation penalizes this situation with worse fit indices
(e.g., Curran et al., 1996; Yang and Liang, 2013), that is, if
fit indices point to quite reasonable fit, one could expect that
with multivariately normal data, even better model fit could
have been achieved. Thus, the path model was fitted using
ML estimation to allow for imputation of missing values using
full-information maximum likelihood (FIML). Yet, to scrutinize
the results, the analysis was repeated with diagonally weighted
least squares (DWLS) estimation that can be considered the
more appropriate method when the assumption of multivariate
normality is violated (Li, 2016), but does not allow to impute
missing values, resulting in a lower sample size. Model fit
was evaluated using the Comparative Fit Index (CFI), the
Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA), and the
Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR). Model fit
was considered good for CFI > 0.95, RMSEA < 0.06, and
SRMR < 0.08 (Hu and Bentler, 1999). Indirect effects were
computed as products of the direct path coefficients for all
pathways via which NFC might impact on the respective outcome
variables: (a) NFC—school GPA—university GPA; (b) NFC—
study satisfaction—termination thoughts; (c) NFC—university
GPA—termination thoughts; (d) NFC—university GPA—study
satisfaction; (e) NFC—study satisfaction—university GPA; (f)
NFC—school GPA—university GPA—termination thoughts; (g)
NFC—school GPA—university GPA—study satisfaction; and
(h) NFC—school GPA—university GPA—study satisfaction—
termination thoughts. For all direct and indirect effects, standard
errors were determined using standard bootstrapping with 1,000
replicates.
We assessed NFC with the German 16-item short scale (Bless
et al., 1994). Responses were recorded on a 7-point rating scale
from −3 (completely disagree) to +3 (completely agree) and
summed.
Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and Openness to Experience
were assessed with the 21-item version of the Big Five Inventory
(Rammstedt and John, 2005). Responses were rated on five levels
of agreement from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
Responses were averaged per dimension.
We assessed previous academic performance by self-report of
the GPA from the Abitur, that is, the German university entrance
diploma. This measure is referred to as school GPA. Grades could
range between 1 and 5. Grades were recoded so that 1 reflects
failure and 5 indicates best performance.
Success in University
Participants reported their current GPA (referred to as university
GPA) as well as their three best grades in their previous
examinations. Grades could range between 1 and 5. Grades
were recoded so that 1 reflects failure and 5 indicates the best
performance2 .
Satisfaction with one’s studies was assessed with 12 items 3 that
were based on Krapp et al. (1993) and Westermann et al. (1996).
The 12-item measure is displayed in Table A1 in Supplementary
Material. We combined aspects out of both instruments as we
intended to assess aspects of satisfaction with one’s studies that
were to be found in different measures: satisfaction with the
contents of one’s studies (“I have chosen my current studies above
all because of their interesting contents”), academic-related stress
(“I often feel tired and tense because of my studies,” recoded)
as well as general academic satisfaction/enjoyment (“I like to
study”). Answers were scored on a 4-point rating scale from 1
(totally untrue) to 4 (totally true) and averaged.
Participants were asked whether they had ever thought
of quitting their studies or changing their major domain of
study (1 = never to 6 = often). When such termination
thoughts occurred, the reasons were assessed with 12 categories
including “lacking motivation,” “unappealing study contents,”
and “pressure to perform.”
2 The
finally reported analyses do not include the three best grades as measure of
success because of a large overlap with university GPA (rs = 0.73).
3 In the first version of this manuscript, three items aiming at individual confidence
referring to study-specific demands were also included in the instrument. As a
result of the review process, they are no more part of the study satisfaction scale in
order to get a less heterogeneous measure. The main results as well as the internal
consistency of the 12- and 15-item version were largely comparable.
Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org
4
May 2017 | Volume 8 | Article 790
Grass et al.
NFC Predicts Academic Success
RESULTS
NFC and university GPA (rs = 0.19, p < 0.001). The strongest
correlation concerning NFC could be observed for satisfaction
with one’s studies (rs = 0.40, p < 0.001). Satisfaction with
one’s studies was moderately associated with better university
GPA (rs = 0.37, p < 0.001) and with less frequent termination
thoughts (rs = −0.48, p < 0.001). University GPA and
termination thoughts were negatively related (rs = −0.21,
p < 0.001). Analyzing all correlations between NFC and the
self-reported reasons of termination thoughts (n = 217), we
found significant associations of rpb = −0.23 (p = 0.001) with
“not feeling that one belonged,” rpb = −0.18 (p = 0.008)
with a “lack of motivation,” and rpb = −0.15 (p = 0.031)
with a “perceived missing link between theory and practice.”
NFC was not significantly associated (p > 0.05) with the
remaining categories “pressure to perform,” “lacking success in
one’s studies,” “unappealing study contents,” “inadequate study
conditions,” “interest in different (study) subjects,” “financing
problems,” “bad occupational outlook/ future perspective,” “other
personal issues,” and “dissatisfaction with study demands,” and a
category of not classifiable answers. Each category was chosen by
5–85 participants; <50 statements were registered for the seven
last-named categories (5–24 choices per category).
Descriptive statistics and reliabilities of all instruments are
displayed in Table 1.
Relations between NFC and Academic
Success
The correlations of all variables with NFC and outcomemeasures of success in university are depicted in Table 2.
NFC was significantly associated with all success measures
comprising both, aspects of performance as well as satisfaction.
As expected, we found a small positive correlation between
TABLE 1 | Descriptive statistics and reliabilities of personality traits and
success measures.
Score
Min
Max
SD
17.06
12.69
−35.00
46.00
396 0.86
Conscientiousness
3.55
0.72
1.50
5.00
396 0.73
Neuroticism
3.17
0.91
1.00
5.00
396 0.78
Openness to experience
3.97
0.70
1.80
5.00
396 0.71
3.83
0.64
2.30
5.00
395
–
University GPAb
3.85
0.67
1.00
5.00
367
–
Satisfaction with one’s studies
3.01
0.42
1.50
3.92
396 0.80
Termination thoughtsc
2.14
1.36
1.00
6.00
396
Need for cognition
n
αa
M
Personality factors
School GPAb
Predicting Academic Success with NFC
The fit of the path model in the total sample of N = 396 with
FIML-imputed missing values was excellent (χ 2 = 1.94, df = 3,
p = 0.585, CFI = 1, RMSEA = 0.00 with 90% confidence interval
0.00–0.07, SRMR = 0.01). Figure 2 provides the standardized
path coefficients for the direct paths. As expected, NFC and
broad personality traits (ESOC) were correlated (r = 0.43,
p < 0.001). The paths from NFC to study satisfaction (β = 0.28,
p < 0.001) and from study satisfaction to termination thoughts
were significant (β = −0.51, p < 0.001), as was the indirect
path from NFC via study satisfaction to termination thoughts
Success in university
–
N = 396. Different n due to selectively missing answers. Min, minimum value. Max,
maximum value. GPA, grade point average.
a Internal consistency, Cronbach’s alpha.
b Recoded: 1 = low performance, 5 = high performance.
c 1= never, 6 = often.
TABLE 2 | Correlations between the predictor variables, NFC, and success in university.
Satisfaction with one’s studies
Termination thoughts
University GPA
NFC
Success in university
Satisfaction with one’s studies
Termination thoughts
University GPA
–
–
−0.48**
0.37**
−0.21**
–
NFC
0.40**
−0.18**
0.19**
–
Genderb
0.10
−0.09
0.14**
−0.01**
Age
−0.10
−0.06
Time in current major
−0.18**
Predictors
0.08
−0.11*
0.15**
−0.07
0.07**
School GPA
0.18**
−0.09
0.43**
0.16**
Conscientiousness
0.31**
−0.25**
0.28**
0.27**
−0.21**
0.20**
−0.00
−0.25**
0.01
−0.03
0.21**
Neuroticism
Openness to Experience
0.16**
n = 367–396. Spearman’s rank correlations except for the correlations with gender (point-biserial correlations). NFC, Need for Cognition; GPA, grade point average.
a Refers to the three best grades during the current studies.
b 1, male; 2, female.
*p < 0.05. **p < 0.01. Bold: Bonferroni-corrected significance level p < 0.0015.
Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org
5
May 2017 | Volume 8 | Article 790
Grass et al.
NFC Predicts Academic Success
FIGURE 2 | Path model relating NFC to diverse academic outcomes. NFC, Need for Cognition. GPA, grade point average. ESOC, overall score of inverse
Neuroticism (i.e., Emotional Stability), Openness, and Conscientiousness that should reflect personality characteristics beneficial for academic success. Bold = p <
0.001, bold italic = p < 0.05, italic = p < 0.10. The indirect effect of NFC on Termination Thoughts via Study Satisfaction is significant (β = −0.14, p < 0.001). The
criteria’s variance explained by their predictors is 1 minus the respective error variances.
former school performance, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism,
and Openness to Experience. NFC was positively associated
with academic performance, with satisfaction, and with less
termination thoughts. Remarkably, satisfaction with one’s studies
showed the strongest, medium-sized association with NFC. Path
analysis confirmed the importance of NFC for study satisfaction
showing that NFC had a significant direct effect on study
satisfaction and via this variable also a significant indirect effect
on termination thoughts.
(β = −0.14, p < 0.001), while the other indirect paths involving
NFC were insignificant (p ≥ 0.088). Further significant paths
emerged from ESOC to school GPA (β = 0.13, p = 0.018) and
to study satisfaction (β = 0.22, p < 0.001), from school GPA to
university GPA (β = 0.36, p < 0.001), and from university GPA to
study satisfaction (β = 0.24, p < 0.018; all other p ≥ 0.074). Using
DWLS estimation of the model in those participants without
missing values (n = 367), model fit was still excellent (χ 2 = 0.77,
df = 3, p = 0.856, CFI = 1, RMSEA = 0.00 with 90% confidence
interval 0.00–0.05, SRMR = 0.01) and no essential changes in
path coefficients and their significance occurred, indicating no
influence of the estimation method on the stability of the results.
A model with all paths involving NFC fixed to zero–again
estimated using ML/FIML–showed bad fit (χ 2 = 41.52, df = 6,
p < 0.001, CFI = 0.92, RMSEA = 0.12 with 90% confidence
interval 0.09–0.16, SRMR = 0.06), and a χ 2 differences test
between this model and the model with free estimation of the
path coefficients involving NFC was significant (χ 2 diff = 39.58,
df diff = 3, p < 0.001). This suggests that a model including NFC
is superior to a model without NFC-related influences.
Direct Relations
Performance
As expected, we found a small correlation of NFC with university
GPA (rs = 0.19), which is quite comparable to the average
correlation found by Richardson et al. (2012) and von Stumm
and Ackerman (2013). In our data, associations of university GPA
with school GPA (rs = 0.43) and Conscientiousness (rs = 0.28)
were (slightly) higher but still comparable to meta-analytic
coefficients reported by Richardson et al. (2012).
Satisfaction
DISCUSSION
The focus of our study was to extent previous research by
including rather affective measures of success as, for instance,
satisfaction. We found the strongest relation of NFC with
satisfaction with one’s studies (rs = 0.40). The correlation
between satisfaction with one’s studies and Conscientiousness
was weaker (rs = 0.31), followed by Neuroticism with rs = −0.21.
Furthermore, we found a small association of NFC with the
frequency of termination thoughts (rs = −0.18). Together, these
results clearly support the assumption that higher NFC goes
along with increasing satisfaction with and less doubts about one’s
This study focused on the relevance of NFC for success in
university, namely for academic performance, satisfaction with
one’s studies, and termination thoughts. Whereas, previous
studies in this area focused mostly on performance measures,
this study aimed at a broader perspective on NFC and academic
success by additionally including subjective and more affective
indicators of success in university. We examined direct relations
as well as the predictive value of NFC likewise considering
Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org
6
May 2017 | Volume 8 | Article 790
Grass et al.
NFC Predicts Academic Success
the complex role of NFC in academic contexts. Specifically,
the present results highlight an often underestimated aspect of
NFC, which is not only defined by the intrinsic motivation to
but also by the enjoyment of effortful cognitive endeavors—
with university studies certainly being one exemplar of the
latter. Quite strikingly, university GPA had merely no effect on
termination thoughts, while study satisfaction did and did so
partly based on the individual level of NFC. Thus, one conclusion
that can be drawn from the present findings is that in cognitively
challenging situations, NFC has an impact on positive outcomes
not or not only because of a higher motivation to master these
challenges, but also because of the positive appraisal of (dealing
with) these situations.
Our findings are in line with previous research that reported
links of NFC to life satisfaction (Coutinho and Woolery, 2004)
and to job satisfaction (Park et al., 2008) and suggest that NFC
has implications for study satisfaction as well. With regard to the
few findings on NFC and aspects of emotional adaptation (e.g.,
Bertrams and Dickhäuser, 2012), the current results underscore
the notion that the relationship of NFC with affective variables is
not limited to basic resources and general emotional states, but
also translates into important life outcomes such as satisfaction
in academic contexts. This is all the more relevant given the
aforementioned evidence that satisfied students also tend to
be the ones who perform better (Judge et al., 2001) and that
dissatisfaction can—regardless of academic performance—limit
the likelihood to graduate and to subsequently work in the
respective field of expertise (e.g., Hellman, 1997). Summarizing,
the present results highlight the role of NFC as an important
resource in academic contexts by way of its affective implications.
studies and thereby extend previous findings on associations
between NFC and affective adjustment.
Similarly, we found negative associations between NFC and
three reasons for termination thoughts: first, with the feeling
not to belong. This might be either a side effect of enhanced
satisfaction by enabling more integration with other people or
refer to independent social-emotional effects of NFC (Bertrams
and Dickhäuser, 2012). Alternatively, individuals may not tend
to experience enhanced feelings of belonging with increasing
NFC but may not consider them relevant to think about quitting
their studies. The second negatively associated reason was a
lack of motivation: As stable motivational tendency to invest
cognitive effort, NFC is likely to enhance a person’s motivation to
engage in the cognitive challenges involved in higher education.
Third, NFC negatively correlated with a subjectively experienced
shortage of relations between theory and practice. As higher NFC
promotes an elaborated processing of information, one could
imagine that higher NFC will promote the tendency to build
ideas of such relations autonomously if lectures fail to present
them explicitly. Alternatively, individuals with higher NFC may
appreciate theoretical inputs more and NFC may influence how
people evaluate the relation between theory and practice. In
sum, the associations of NFC with termination thoughts and
satisfaction equally point to its relevance for the way in which
students experience their studies and at its meaning to outcomes
beyond performance measures like grades. Taking into account
the low frequency of statements for some categories, our results
for reasons to think about quitting/changing one’s studies should
be taken as first exploratory results and need to be replicated.
Summarizing, the current results highlight the importance of
NFC for affective processes and outcomes. They underscore the
necessity to increase research activities on affective implications
of NFC, and to examine the underlying processes or variables of
these associations.
Limitations and Future Research
Our study provides a differentiated view on how NFC predicts
success in university and highlights its importance in modulating
study satisfaction. Future studies should follow up on these
findings by including others’ perspectives, objective performance
assessments, and longitudinal designs in order to avoid reliance
on retrospective measures or subjective estimations only.
Furthermore, our measure of satisfaction with one’s studies that
resulted from an integration of existing scales should be further
validated against other approaches to assess study satisfaction.
Also, it may be worthwhile to distinguish between the role of
NFC in study satisfaction in different types of study programs,
i.e., programs that are more oriented toward basic science in
comparison to programs that are more focused on applied
sciences. Similarly, future studies could systematically examine
differences in major subjects and intended degrees (bachelor
vs. master). We encourage prospective research to extend our
research by following its comprehensive perspective and by
deepening the understanding of our results.
How NFC Predicts Success in University
We originally assumed that NFC and broader personality traits
would positively impact on both school and university GPA as
well as study satisfaction, with the latter also being influenced by
university GPA. Furthermore, we expected termination thoughts
to arise from both lower university GPA and lower study
satisfaction. Interestingly, despite bivariate relationships between
NFC and Conscientiousness with university GPA as well as
between NFC and school GPA, these relationships did not or
not fully emerge in the comprehensive path model. Instead, the
most prominent way in which NFC had an impact was a direct
path to study satisfaction and via this variable on termination
thoughts. Thus, the present results suggest a role of NFC on
academic success primarily by way of its role in modulating study
satisfaction that in turn reduces the likelihood of termination
thoughts.
This finding is somewhat contradictory to the body of
evidence that suggests a direct influence of NFC on academic
success as indicated by school or university grades. However,
these previous studies mainly only investigated bivariate
relationships. Considering further modulating or, more precisely
in the present context, mediating factors such as study
satisfaction may aid in gathering a more precise insight in
Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
JG and AnS conceived and designed the study, organized and
supervised data collection, and pre-processing. JG and AlS
analyzed the data, all three authors wrote parts of the manuscript
and gave final approval of the manuscript to be published.
7
May 2017 | Volume 8 | Article 790
Grass et al.
NFC Predicts Academic Success
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL
We cordially thank Sarah Krause, Lena Güngör, and Anna-Lena
Freisenhausen for their help with the data collection and parts of
the analyses.
The Supplementary Material for this article can be found
online at: http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.
2017.00790/full#supplementary-material
REFERENCES
Lent, R. W., Singley, D., Sheu, H.-B., Gainor, K. A., Brenner, B. R., Treistman,
D., et al. (2005). Social cognitive predictors of domain and life satisfaction:
exploring the theoretical precursors of subjective well-being. J. Couns. Psychol.
52, 429–442. doi: 10.1037/0022-0167.52.3.429
Li, C.-H. (2016). Confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data: comparing robust
maximum likelihood and diagonally weighted least squares. Behav. Res. 48,
936–949. doi: 10.3758/s13428-015-0619-7
Meier, E., Vogl, K., and Preckel, F. (2014). Motivational characteristics of students
in gifted classes: the pivotal role of need for cognition. Learn. Individ. Dif. 33,
39–46. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2014.04.006
Mussel, P. (2010). Epistemic curiosity and related constructs: lacking
evidence of discriminant validity. Pers. Individ. Dif. 49, 506–510.
doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2010.05.014
Park, H. S., Baker, C., and Lee, D. W. (2008). Need for cognition, task complexity,
and job satisfaction. J. Manage. Eng. 24, 111–117. doi: 10.1061/(asce)0742597x(2008)24:2(111)
Poropat, A. E. (2009). A meta-analysis of the five-factor model of personality and
academic performance. Psychol. Bull. 135, 322–338. doi: 10.1037/a0014996
Preckel, F., Holling, H., and Vock, M. (2006). Academic underachievement:
relationship with cognitive motivation, achievement motivation, and
conscientiousness. Psychol. Sch. 43, 401–411. doi: 10.1002/pits.20154
QuestBack GmbH (2015). Enterprise Feedback Suite: EFS Survey (Version 10.5).
Cologne: QuestBack GmbH. Available online at: http://www.unipark.de/
Rammstedt, B., and John, O. P. (2005). Kurzversion des Big Five Inventori
(BFI-K): Entwicklung und Validierung eines ökonomischen Inventars zur
Erfassung der fünf Faktoren der Persönlichkeit [Short version of the Big Five
Inventory (BFI-K): development and validation of an economic inventory
for assessment of the five factors of personality]. Diagnostica 51, 195–206.
doi: 10.1026/0012-1924.51.4.195
R Core Team (2016). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing.
Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available online at:
https://www.r-project.org/
RStudio Team (2016). RStudio: Integrated Development Environment for R. Boston,
MA: RStudio Inc. Available online at: http://www.rstudio.com/
Revelle, W. (2016). psych: Procedures for Psychological, Psychometric, and
Personality Research (Version 1.6.9). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University.
Available online at: https://cran.r-project.org/
Richardson, M., Abraham, C., and Bond, R. (2012). Psychological correlates of
university students’ academic performance: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Psychol. Bull. 138, 353–387. doi: 10.1037/a0026838
Rindermann, H., and Oubaid, V. (1999). Auswahl von Studienanfängern
durch Universitäten - Kriterien, Verfahren und Prognostizierbarkeit
des Studienerfolgs [College student admission: criteria, procedures, and
predictability of study success]. Z. Diff. Diagn. Psychol. [J. Individ. Dif.] 20,
172–191. doi: 10.1024/0170-1789.20.3.172
Robbins, S. B., Lauver, K., Le, H., Davis, D., Langley, R., and Carlstrom, A.
(2004). Do psychosocial and study skill factors predict college outcomes?
A meta-analysis. Psychol. Bull. 130, 261–288. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.130.
2.261
Rosseel, Y. (2012). lavaan: an R package for structural equation modeling. J. Stat.
Softw. 48, 1–36. doi: 10.18637/jss.v048.i02
Schmidt, F. L., and Hunter, J. E. (1998). The validity and utility of
selection methods in personnel psychology: practical and theoretical
implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychol. Bull. 124, 262–274.
doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.124.2.262
See, Y. H., Petty, R. E., and Evans, L. M. (2009). The impact of perceived message
complexity and need for cognition on information processing and attitudes. J.
Res. Pers. 43, 880–889. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2009.04.006
Ackerman, P. L., and Heggestad, E. D. (1997). Intelligence, personality,
and interests: evidence for overlapping traits. Psychol. Bull. 121, 219–245.
doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.121.2.219
Bertrams, A., and Dickhäuser, O. (2012). Passionate thinkers feel better: selfcontrol capacity as mediator of the relationship between need for cognition and
affective adjustment. J. Individ. Dif. 33, 69–75. doi: 10.1027/1614-0001/a000081
Bless, H., Wänke, M., Bohner, G., Fellhauer, R. F., and Schwarz, N. (1994).
Need for Cognition: Eine Skala zur Erfassung von Engagement und Freude
bei Denkaufgaben [Need for cognition: a scale measuring engagement and
happiness in cognitive tasks]. Z. Sozialpsychol. [Soc. Psychol.] 25, 147–154.
Blom, G. (1958). Statistical Estimates and Transformed Beta Variables. New York,
NY: John Wiley.
Cacioppo, J. T., and Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol.
42, 116–131. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.116
Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Feinstein, J. A., and Jarvis, W. B. G. (1996).
Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: the life and times of
individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychol. Bull. 119, 197–253.
doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.197
Chamorro-Premuzic, T., and Furnham, A. (2003). Personality traits and academic
examination performance. Eur. J. Pers. 17, 237–250. doi: 10.1002/per.473
Coutinho, S. A., and Woolery, L. M. (2004). The need for cognition and life
satisfaction among college students. Coll. Stud. J. 38, 203–206.
Curran, P. J., West, S. G., and Finch, J. F. (1996). The robustness of test statistics to
non-normality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychol.
Methods 1, 16–29. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.1.1.16
Deary, I. J., Strand, S., Smith, P., and Fernandes, C. (2007). Intelligence
and educational achievement. Intelligence 35, 13–21. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.
2006.02.001
Fleischhauer, M., Enge, S., Brocke, B., Ullrich, J., Strobel, A., and Strobel, A.
(2010). Same or different? Clarifying the relationship of need for cognition to
personality and intelligence. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 36, 82–96. doi: 10.1177/
0146167209351886
Goff, M., and Ackerman, P. L. (1992). Personality-intelligence relations:
assessment of typical intellectual engagement. J. Educ. Psychol. 84, 537–552.
doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.84.4.537
Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative “description of personality”:
the big-five factor structure. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 59, 1216–1229.
doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.59.6.1216
Hellman, C. M. (1997). Job satisfaction and intent to leave. J. Soc. Psychol. 137,
677–689. doi: 10.1080/00224549709595491
Hill, B. D., Foster, J. D., Elliott, E. M., Shelton, J. T., McCain, J., and Gouvier, W.
D. (2013). Need for cognition is related to higher general intelligence, fluid
intelligence, and crystallized intelligence, but not working memory. J. Res. Pers.
47, 22–25. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2012.11.001
Hu, L. T., and Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance
structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct. Equ.
Model. A Multidisc. J. 6, 1–55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118
Jamshidian, M., Jalal, S., and Jansen, C. (2014). MissMech: an R package for testing
homoscedasticity, multivariate normality, and Missing Completely at Random
(MCAR). J. Stat. Softw. 56, 1–31. doi: 10.18637/jss.v056.i06
Judge, T. A., Thoresen, C. J., Bono, J. E., and Patton, G. K. (2001). The job
satisfaction-job performance relationship: a qualitative and quantitative review.
Psychol. Bull. 127, 376–407. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.127.3.376
Krapp, A., Schiefele, U., Wild, K. P., and Winteler, A. (1993). Der Fragebogen
zum Studieninteresse (FSI) [Study Interest Questionnaire (FSI)]. Diagnostica
39, 335–351.
Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org
8
May 2017 | Volume 8 | Article 790
Grass et al.
NFC Predicts Academic Success
von Stumm, S., Hell, B., and Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2011b). The hungry mind:
intellectual curiosity is the third pillar of academic performance. Perspect.
Psychol. Sci. 6, 574–588. doi: 10.1177/1745691611421204
Westermann, R., Heise, E., Spies, K., and Trautwein, U. (1996). Identifikation
und Erfassung von Komponenten der Studienzufriedenheit [Identifiying and
assessing components of study satisfaction]. Psychol. Erziehung Unterr. 43,
1–22.
Yang, Y., and Liang, X. (2013). Confirmatory factor analysis under violations of
distributional and structural assumptions. Int. J. Quant. Res. Educ. 1, 61–84.
doi: 10.1504/IJQRE.2013.055642
Strenze, T. (2007). Intelligence and socioeconomic success: a meta-analytic
review of longitudinal research. Intelligence 35, 401–426. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.
2006.09.004
Tolentino, E., Curry, L., and Leak, G. (1990). Further validation of the
short form of the need for cognition scale. Psychol. Rep. 66, 321–322.
doi: 10.2466/pr0.1990.66.1.321
Trapmann, S., Hell, B., Hirn, J.-O. W., and Schuler, H. (2007a). Meta-analysis of the
relationship between the big five and academic success at university. Z. Psychol.
[J. Psychol.] 215, 132–151. doi: 10.1027/0044-3409.215.2.132
Trapmann, S., Hell, B., Weigand, S., and Schuler, H. (2007b). Die Validität
von Schulnoten zur Vorhersage des Studienerfolgs - Eine Metaanalyse [The
validity of school grades for academic achievement - A meta-analysis].
Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie [Ger. J. Educ. Psychol.] 21, 11–27.
doi: 10.1024/1010-0652.21.1.11
von Stumm, S., and Ackerman, P. L. (2013). Investment and intellect: a review and
meta-analysis. Psychol. Bull. 139, 841–869. doi: 10.1037/a0030746
von Stumm, S., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., and Ackerman, P. (2011a). “Re-visiting
intelligence-personality associations. Vindicating intellectual engagement,” in
The Wiley-Blackwell Handbook of Individual Differences, 1st Edn., eds T.
Chamorro-Premuzic, S. von Stumm, and A. Furnham (Chicester: WileyBlackwell), 217–241.
Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org
Conflict of Interest Statement: The authors declare that the research was
conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could
be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Copyright © 2017 Grass, Strobel and Strobel. This is an open-access article
distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY).
The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the
original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this
journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution
or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
9
May 2017 | Volume 8 | Article 790